Rainswept wrote:I just don't get how flawed = endearing. I mean characters don't need to be perfect for me to like them, but some of the books I've read (usually at the suggestion of some girlfriend or other) have protagonists I want to just slap for sheer stupidity. Of Human Bondage and Valley of the Dolls leap to mind as classic examples.

Romeo and Juliette were both morons.

If you refer to the characters from the play "Romeo and Juliet", then, (along with reminding you of how to SPELL it), remember that they are CHILDREN and they were also fucked over by fate and society. If you meant some other characters, then, nvm.

The thin line between genius and insanity is less of a border than a union.

"Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes. Each can draw the other into a wider world, a world in which both can flourish."--Pope John Paul II

Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.-Albert Einstein

Rainswept wrote:I just don't get how flawed = endearing. I mean characters don't need to be perfect for me to like them, but some of the books I've read (usually at the suggestion of some girlfriend or other) have protagonists I want to just slap for sheer stupidity. Of Human Bondage and Valley of the Dolls leap to mind as classic examples.

Romeo and Juliette were both morons.

If you refer to the characters from the play "Romeo and Juliet", then, (along with reminding you of how to SPELL it), remember that they are CHILDREN and they were also fucked over by fate and society. If you meant some other characters, then, nvm.

Is there any reference to their ages in the text? I always imagined them about 16-18.

Too old to give up but too young to rest - Pete Townshend

I would rather be a rising ape than a falling angel - Sir Terry Pratchett

Rainswept wrote:I just don't get how flawed = endearing. I mean characters don't need to be perfect for me to like them, but some of the books I've read (usually at the suggestion of some girlfriend or other) have protagonists I want to just slap for sheer stupidity. Of Human Bondage and Valley of the Dolls leap to mind as classic examples.

Romeo and Juliette were both morons.

If you refer to the characters from the play "Romeo and Juliet", then, (along with reminding you of how to SPELL it), remember that they are CHILDREN and they were also fucked over by fate and society. If you meant some other characters, then, nvm.

Is there any reference to their ages in the text? I always imagined them about 16-18.

Juliet "hath not seen the change of fourteen years", and Romeo's age is never given.

The thin line between genius and insanity is less of a border than a union.

"Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes. Each can draw the other into a wider world, a world in which both can flourish."--Pope John Paul II

Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.-Albert Einstein

Indeed. Juliet is swept way by "true" love, and, in four days, is dead, and Romeo with her, all before she even turns fourteen years old. They're nought but children, and yet they overcome their families' irrational hatred of each other. And, with their death, they bury their parent's strife, also.

The thin line between genius and insanity is less of a border than a union.

"Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes. Each can draw the other into a wider world, a world in which both can flourish."--Pope John Paul II

Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.-Albert Einstein

I haven't been required to read Shakespeare for years. When I do so now, it is for my own enjoyment. I don't understand people who don't love Shakespeare. I mean, he was hysterical. Seriously, some of the most clever, funny shit you'll read was written by him. My guess is that not enough people understand it, so they don't see the appeal, and therefore think those of us who are getting something out of it must be faking it to look smart. If you think Douglas Adams knows his way around a pun, he's got nothing on Will.

True terror lies in the futility of human existence.

Malcolm Reynolds is my co-pilot.

"The only freedom deserving the name, is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it. Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily, or mental and spiritual. Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest." - John Stuart Mill

Capellini wrote:I haven't been required to read Shakespeare for years. When I do so now, it is for my own enjoyment. I don't understand people who don't love Shakespeare. I mean, he was hysterical. Seriously, some of the most clever, funny shit you'll read was written by him. My guess is that not enough people understand it, so they don't see the appeal, and therefore think those of us who are getting something out of it must be faking it to look smart. If you think Douglas Adams knows his way around a pun, he's got nothing on Will.

Oh I don't disagree, although it does need to be pointed out that the vast majority of his work was retelling other people's stories.

Juliet was indeed 13, which doesn't preclude her from being a moron. How many 13 year olds kill themselves over a boy? Stupid characters just don't do it for me. as I said, I just don't get how flawed = endearing. I've seen some flawed characters who were interesting, such as Hannibal Lecter, but I never find it endearing.

I believe it's time for mankind to set aside the crutch of religion and embrace morality born of reason and truth. Those crutches have long since proven treacherous when the ground gets slippery.

Capellini wrote:I haven't been required to read Shakespeare for years. When I do so now, it is for my own enjoyment. I don't understand people who don't love Shakespeare. I mean, he was hysterical. Seriously, some of the most clever, funny shit you'll read was written by him. My guess is that not enough people understand it, so they don't see the appeal, and therefore think those of us who are getting something out of it must be faking it to look smart. If you think Douglas Adams knows his way around a pun, he's got nothing on Will.

Oh I don't disagree, although it does need to be pointed out that the vast majority of his work was retelling other people's stories.

Juliet was indeed 13, which doesn't preclude her from being a moron. How many 13 year olds kill themselves over a boy? Stupid characters just don't do it for me. as I said, I just don't get how flawed = endearing. I've seen some flawed characters who were interesting, such as Hannibal Lecter, but I never find it endearing.

Flawed does not equal endearing, hence my use of the word AND. Flawed AND endearing. Two things. One of them, flawed. The other, endearing.

True terror lies in the futility of human existence.

Malcolm Reynolds is my co-pilot.

"The only freedom deserving the name, is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it. Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily, or mental and spiritual. Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest." - John Stuart Mill

Capellini wrote: Flawed does not equal endearing, hence my use of the word AND. Flawed AND endearing. Two things. One of them, flawed. The other, endearing.

Well good. Means you have better tastes in literature than some of the girls I've dated lol.

When characters are majorly flawed in a decision-making way, it usually bothers me so much that I cannot find them relatable at all, and hence don't enjoy the story. read Valley of the Dolls or Of human Bondage, you'll see what I mean.

I believe it's time for mankind to set aside the crutch of religion and embrace morality born of reason and truth. Those crutches have long since proven treacherous when the ground gets slippery.

Honestly, I think history has severely misinterpreted Romeo and Juliet. It is not a timeless love story, it's a commentary on the flaws of aristocratic society.

"How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, 'This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant. God must be even greater than we dreamed'? Instead they say, 'No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way.'" - Carl Sagan

"To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection." - Henri Poincaré

The thin line between genius and insanity is less of a border than a union.

"Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes. Each can draw the other into a wider world, a world in which both can flourish."--Pope John Paul II

Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.-Albert Einstein